NEW YORK - Members of America’s pro

NEW YORK - Members of America’s professional and managerial classes have always left college confident of at least one thing: they had taken their last test. From here on, they could rely on charm, cunning* and/or a record of s accomplishment to propel them up the corporate ladder.

But that’s not necessarily true any longer. A growing number of companies, from General Motors Corp to American Express Co., are no longer satisfied with traditional job interviews. Instead, they are requiring 10 applicants for many white-collar jobs — from top executives down - to submit to a series of paper-and-pencil tests, role-playing exercises, simulated decision-making exercises and brainteasers*. Others put candidates through a long series of interviews by psychologists or trained interviewers.

15 The tests are not about mathematics or grammar, nor about any of the basic technical skills for which many production, sales and clerical workers have long been tested. Rather, employers want to evaluate candidates on intangible* qualities: Is she creative and entrepreneurial? 20 Can he lead and coach? Is he flexible and capable of learning? Does she have passion and a sense of urgency? How will he function under pressure? Most important, will the potential recruit fit the corporate culture?

These tests, which can take from an hour to two days, 25 are all part of a broader trend. ‘Companies are getting much more careful about hiring,’ said Paul R. Ray Jr., chairman of the Association of Executive Search Consultants.

Ten years ago, candidates could win a top job with the right look and the right answers to questions such as ‘Why 30 do you want this job?’. Now, many are having to face questions and exercises intended to learn how they get things done.

They may, for example, have to describe in great detail not one career accomplishment but many - so that patterns 35 of behavior emerge. They may face questions such as ‘Who is the best manager you ever worked for and why?’ or ‘What is your best friend like?’. The answers, psychologists say, reveal much about a candidate’s management style and about himself or herself.

40 The reason for the interrogations is clear: many hires*

work out badly. About 35 percent of recently hired senior executives are judged failures, according to the Center for Creative Leadership in Greensboro, North Carolina, which surveyed nearly 500 chief executives.

45 The cost of bringing the wrong person on board is

sometimes huge. Searching and training can cost from $5000 for a lower-level manager to $250,000 for a top executive. Years of corporate downsizing, a trend that has slashed* layers of management, has also increased the so potential damage that one bad executive can do. With the pace of change accelerating in markets and technology,companies want to know how an executive will perform, not just how he or she has performed.

‘Years ago, employers looked for experience - has a 55 candidate done this before?’ said Harold P. Weinstein, executive vice-president of Caliper, a personnel testing and consulting firm in Princeton, New Jersey. ‘But having experience in a job does not guarantee that you can do it in a different environment.’

60 At this point, most companies have not shifted to this practice. Some do not see the need or remain unconvinced that such testing is worth the cost. But human-resource specialists say anecdotal* evidence suggests that white-collar testing is growing in popularity. What has 65 brought so many employers around to testing is a sense of the limitations in the usual job interview. With so little information on which to base a decision, ‘most people hire people they like, rather than the most competent person,’ said Orv Owens, a psychologist in Snohomish, Washington, 70 who sizes up executive candidates. Research has shown, he said, that ‘most decision makers make their hiring decisions in the first five minutes of an interview and spend the rest of the time
10.01.14
rationalizing their choice.’

Besides, with advice on how to land a better job about 75 as common as a ten-dollar bill, many people are learning to play the interview game.

Even companies that have not started extensive testing have toughened their hiring practices. Many now do background checks, for example, looking for signs of drug 80 use, violence or sexual harassment. But the more comprehensive testing aims to measure skills in communications, analysis and organization, attention to detail and management style; personality traits* and motivations that behavioral scientists say predict 85 performance.

Ergebnisse (Chinesisch Traditionell) 1:

紐約-美國的專業和管理類的成員已經離開學院有信心至少一件事： 他們採取了他們最後一次測試。從這裡開始，他們可以依靠的魅力、 狡猾和 s 成就來推動他們上爬的。但那不再是不一定是真的。越來越多的公司，從通用到美國運通不再滿足于傳統的求職面試。相反，他們亦需 10 申請人很多白領的工作 — — 從高層下將提交一系列的紙筆測試，角色扮演練習，類比決策活動和腦筋急轉彎 *。別人把候選人通過一長系列的心理學家或受過訓練的面試官的面試。15.測試不是關於數學或語法，也沒有關于任何基本的技術技能，其中很多的生產，銷售和文職工作人員長時間測試。相反，雇主想要評估候選人對無形 * 品質： 她是創新和創業嗎？20 他能領導和培訓嗎？他是靈活和學習的能力嗎？她有激情和一種緊迫感嗎？他將如何在壓力下工作？最重要的是，將潛在的新兵融入公司文化嗎？這些測試，這可以從一個小時到兩天，25 都是一種更廣泛趨勢的一部分。公司正在鼓勵更加小心，招聘，說 Paul R.射線小，執行搜索顧問協會的主席。Ten years ago, candidates could win a top job with the right look and the right answers to questions such as ‘Why 30 do you want this job?’. Now, many are having to face questions and exercises intended to learn how they get things done.They may, for example, have to describe in great detail not one career accomplishment but many - so that patterns 35 of behavior emerge. They may face questions such as ‘Who is the best manager you ever worked for and why?’ or ‘What is your best friend like?’. The answers, psychologists say, reveal much about a candidate’s management style and about himself or herself.40 The reason for the interrogations is clear: many hires*work out badly. About 35 percent of recently hired senior executives are judged failures, according to the Center for Creative Leadership in Greensboro, North Carolina, which surveyed nearly 500 chief executives.45 The cost of bringing the wrong person on board issometimes huge. Searching and training can cost from $5000 for a lower-level manager to $250,000 for a top executive. Years of corporate downsizing, a trend that has slashed* layers of management, has also increased the so potential damage that one bad executive can do. With the pace of change accelerating in markets and technology,companies want to know how an executive will perform, not just how he or she has performed.‘Years ago, employers looked for experience - has a 55 candidate done this before?’ said Harold P. Weinstein, executive vice-president of Caliper, a personnel testing and consulting firm in Princeton, New Jersey. ‘But having experience in a job does not guarantee that you can do it in a different environment.’60 At this point, most companies have not shifted to this practice. Some do not see the need or remain unconvinced that such testing is worth the cost. But human-resource specialists say anecdotal* evidence suggests that white-collar testing is growing in popularity. What has 65 brought so many employers around to testing is a sense of the limitations in the usual job interview. With so little information on which to base a decision, ‘most people hire people they like, rather than the most competent person,’ said Orv Owens, a psychologist in Snohomish, Washington, 70 who sizes up executive candidates. Research has shown, he said, that ‘most decision makers make their hiring decisions in the first five minutes of an interview and spend the rest of the time10.01.14 rationalizing their choice.’Besides, with advice on how to land a better job about 75 as common as a ten-dollar bill, many people are learning to play the interview game.Even companies that have not started extensive testing have toughened their hiring practices. Many now do background checks, for example, looking for signs of drug 80 use, violence or sexual harassment. But the more comprehensive testing aims to measure skills in communications, analysis and organization, attention to detail and management style; personality traits* and motivations that behavioral scientists say predict 85 performance.

Ergebnisse (Chinesisch Traditionell) 3:

紐約-專業美國的成員和管理類有總是左學院確信至少一件事：他們接受了他們的前考試。從這裡，他們可能依靠魅力、cunning*和s成就紀錄推進他們的不一定是真實其中任一更長的公司ladder.

But。增加的公司，從傑納勒爾Motors Corp到美國運通Co.，不再滿意對傳統工作面試。反而，他們為許多白領工作—從下來高級主管-遞交要求10個申請人給一系列的紙和鉛筆測試，扮演鍛煉、被模仿的政策制定鍛煉和brainteasers*。其他通過採訪長的系列由心理學家的投入候選人或訓練的interviewers.

15測試不是關於數學或語法，亦不關於許多生產，銷售和書記工作者長期被測試了的任何基本的技術技能。相反，雇主要評估intangible*質量的候選人：她是否是創造性和企業的？20他帶領和可以教練？他是否是靈活和能够學會？她是否有激情和緊迫感？他怎麼將起作用在壓力下？最重要，潛在的新兵是否將適合公司文化？

These測試，可能從1小時採取到兩天， 25是一個更加寬廣的趨向的所有部分。「公司變得仔細關於聘用」，保羅R. Ray Jr.說，行政查尋Consultants.

Ten的協會的主席幾年前，候選人可能贏取與正確的神色和正確答案的頂面工作到問題例如「30您為什麼想要這個工作？」。現在，許多必須面對問題，并且鍛煉意欲學會他們怎麼得到事done.

They，例如，可以在了不起的細節必須描述沒有一事業成就，而且許多-，以便行為的樣式35湧現。他們也許面對問題例如「誰是您工作為的最佳的經理，并且為什麼？」或者「什麼是您的最好的朋友像？」。答復，心理學家說，顯露關於候選人的管理方式和關於himself.

40審訊的原因是確切：許多hires*

非常解決。大約35%的最近被聘用的高級主管是被判斷的失敗，根據創造性的領導中心在格林斯博羅，北卡羅來納，勘測幾乎500个首要executives.

45在船上帶來巨大錯誤人的is

sometimes的費用。搜尋和訓練可能從$5000花費底層經理的到$250,000一位高級主管的。幾年公司縮小，有管理slashed*層數的趨向，也增加了一位壞執行委員可能做的那麼可能損害。当變化的步幅加速在市場和技術上，公司要知道執行委員怎麼將執行，不僅怎麼他或她performed.

`幾年前，雇主尋找的經驗-以前有一名55候選人做了此？『在普林斯頓，新澤西行政副總裁說哈羅德P. Weinstein，輪尺、一人員測試和咨詢公司的。「但是有經驗在工作不保證您能做它在一個不同的環境裡。」

60這時，多數公司未轉移到這實踐。一些不看需要也不保持值得懷疑這樣測試值得費用。但是人才專家說anecdotal*證據建議白領測試在大眾化增長。什麼有給測試使信服的許多雇主65是局限的感覺在通常工作面試的。有那麼根據決定， 「的一點信息他們喜歡的多數人聘用人民，而不是最能幹的人」， Orv歐文斯說，一位心理學家在Snohomish，華盛頓， 70誰估量行政候選人。研究表示，他說， `多數作決策者在採訪的前五分鐘內做出他們聘用的決定并且餘下的時間花費
10.01.14
合理化他們的選擇。『

Besides，與關於怎樣的忠告得到一個更好的工作大約75一樣共同作為一個十美金，許多人民學會播放未開始廣泛的測試變了堅韌他們聘用的實踐的採訪game.

Even公司。許多現在做背景檢查，例如，尋找藥物80用途、暴力或者性騷擾的標誌。但是更加全面的測試打算測量在通信的技能、分析和組織、關注細節和管理方式;行為科學家說的個性traits*和刺激預言85表現。